In 1977, the Respondent applied for and was granted a statutory right of occupancy by the then Military Governor of Kaduna State in respect of plot No. 7, Road ‘D’, Malali Kaduna. A Certificate of Occupancy No. NC 4303, dated 2nd November, 1977 and registered as No. NCR.52 at page 52, Volume 10 at the Land Registry Kaduna was issued to him. It was tendered at the trial and admitted as Exhibit 1. The Respondent took possession of the plot in 1977 and in 1985, and 1988, he noticed that the Appellant and Hajiya Bahajatu Katsina were constructing a building on the plot. He immediately warned them separately through his Counsel to stop but they refused to do so. The Respondent filed this action against both of them in the Trial Court.

At the trial, Hajiya Bahajatu Katsina virtually admitted building a wall on the Respondent's plot but the Appellant while denying any act of trespass, claimed that he bought the land or plot in dispute from one Alhaji Mohammed Ahmed Adam with a partially completed building on the plot at the cost of N500,000.00. He also stated that the plot in dispute was originally allocated to the said Alhaji Mohammed Ahmed Adam in 1976 and that after he (Appellant) purchased the plot with the consent of the Military Governor as required by the Land Tenure Law, the latter issued him with a Certificate of Occupancy in his own name in respect of the said plot. He tendered his documents of title to the land and they were admitted as Exhibits A5 to A13.

Exhibit A8 was a Certificate of Occupancy in the name of the Appellant’s vendor, Alhaji Mohammed Ahmed Adam dated 8th March 1987 and Exhibit A13 was a Certificate of Occupancy in the name of the Appellant dated 22nd March 1988 both issued by the Military Governor of Kaduna State in respect of the same plot of land No. 7, Road 'D’, Malali, Kaduna.

The Learned Trial Judge Deali J. (as she then was) in a considered judgment found for the Plaintiff/Respondent against the Defendants and ordered as follows:

Dissatisfied with this order, the Defendants separately appealed to the Court of Appeal. The 1st Defendant Hajiya Bahajatu Katsina, abandoned her appeal which was dismissed pursuant to Order 6 rule 10 of the Court of Appeal Rules 1981. The appeal of the Respondent as 2nd Defendant was considered by the Court of Appeal and was also dismissed with costs. He then appealed to this Court.